I am in direct contact with the firewall admin, so we can make alterations, but these need to be simple rules which we can turn on/off between sessions.
I suspect the rule is “do not block/filter 51111-51113”
Your situation is a bit more ‘edge case’ than most so you are going to have to experiment a bit. Strictly speaking this isn’t a VST connect issue but a firewall config issue.
Let us know if your test works - be interesting to see - and to see if we can up with solutions if it doesn’t
FWIW suspect video uses more standard ports that your firewall/router doesn’t care about which is why that part works.
The facilities has 10 cubase workstations all on the same LAN - all need to work with external performers over the internet. So it’s NOT multiple connections to ONE host…it’s multiple connections to multiple hosts.
That won’t work unless you have 10 seperate internet connections, or make sure that only one station is connected at a time. It would probably get confused as it is to be expected that the network provides messages from all performers to all studios, if this is at all possible.
I understand why that ‘might’ not work on the LAN because of the way it broadcasts locally…but why not over the internet to multiple clients ? You use some kind of gatekeeper (?) that provides ID - then this just NATs back to each computer ? Where would the ‘confusion’ arise ?
Isn’t that like saying “only one person could use Zoom” ?
I really think that the “same ports” is a red herring…your issue is going to be the blocked ports of course…but on a more simple setup then I don’t see why VST connect would behave differently from every other network application ?
I mean you don’t have to limit your web surfing to one computer at once because it is using port 443/80 ? The router takes care of all that.
Hmm you’ve got a point, but that’s probably why the video side made a NAT connection (which actually shouldn’t be allowed on the network, but was just a reckless try of mine, but that’s another point), but the audio needs to run over 51111-51113?
Sure, it’s a snitch to set up some advanced server structure with ID processing, NAT resolvers, load balancers, relay servers, edge computers…
I will ask the Zoom guys how much that will be
Seriously, it sure can be done, but we are not Zoom.
Nevertheless as said, we are working on a tech which would allow for multiple listeners, but not multiple connections to one IP.
Just tested this and it falls over - as musi says, the gatekeeper only allows one login per originating IP address. So anybody else logging in on the LAN (via same public IP) effectively logs out the existing user.
Hi,
Was just listening in on this conversation. I have VST Connect but hadn’t ventured to use it yet, but interested.
As far as this multiple VST connection, does each connection have to have a specific IP address? If one logs the other out if joining in on the LAN with the same IP, what if the second joining party one hides the IP address, say through a VPN? I’m not fully privy of this technology yet but just throwing it out there.
Hi dr
I understand that as I have read through this thread. From what I could read though, it looked like you and GvdB were experimenting on how to connect more than one client to a host studio. My previous post was based on your test in your last post that you said had failed. Maybe I mistook the reasoning.
I’m glad you added the multiple listeners functionality to VST Connect Pro, However still hoping for a Single host to multiple performers option. With the rise in work-from-home and hybrid events, being able to host for multiple performers brings a level of collaboration that would corner the market.
I imagine a Host record at a festival front of house that allows for multiple remote locations to add to the performance. OR Capturing and distributing a Stream of multiple performers in the comfort of their homes/studios to a live and/or virtual audiences.